Sign up today for Post Pro Picks, The Post's free, weekly NFL pick 'em game, where you can win great prizes, form groups to play against your friends, see how you fare against our experts or just play for fun. Register at http://washingtonpost.com/pro-picks

Offense tries to match defense's progress

The offense will try to catch up with the defense when the Redskins return to the field Monday morning to begin their fourth and final session of organized team activities.

Through two voluntary mini-camps and the OTAs, Washington's defense has impressed under coordinator Jim Haslett. There has been limited access to practice during the OTAs, so my observation is based more on conversations and texting with people in the organization than what I've witnessed recently at Redskins Park. And, really, isn't that the way it should be?

Anyway, from what we're hearing, Haslett is a big-time hit with the players. Veterans have quickly embraced his aggressive, Pittsburgh-patterned-3-4 scheme, and are very excited about Haslett's big-play mentality. His eagerness to put linebackers, safeties and even corners in position to make plays on blitzes, and his ability to disguise coverages out of the 3-4 has re-energized the defensive players, from what we've been told.

Guys actually enjoy studying the new stuff in position group meetings and running though it on the field, which often wasn't the case last season. Although many players respected former defensive coordinator Greg Blache, they privately expressed frustration about Blache's conservative approach in the 4-3 and his unwillingness to try new things. Of course, Blache played a big role in Washington finishing among the league leaders in defense during five of his six years with the organization.

But sometimes a fresh perspective is needed, and that's what Haslett has brought. Haslett is doing such a good job to this point, people with the team have said, that the Redskins expect their defense to remain among the NFL's best statistically while also producing more turnovers.

Obviously, it's early. The Redskins are installing a new defense, so It would not be surprising if Haslett and the players experienced some rocky moments throughout the summer and during the pre-season. But from all the buzz, the Redskins are off to a good start on that side of the ball.

Things have not been running as smoothly for the offense. The Shanahans (head coach Mike and offensive coordinator Kyle) are in the process of rebuilding the offensive line, purging former coach Jim Zorn's unproductive West Coast offense from the minds of players and trying to determine whether they have the right wide receivers on the roster.

Devin Thomas has a great opportunity to seize top billing among the wideouts, but he has been slowed by a hamstring injury at times. And when the chiseled third-year player has participated, he hasn't displayed the type of play-after-play consistency the Shanahans like to see from that position.

Malcolm Kelly, hasn't distinguished himself yet, but he's really only beginning his second season. He missed most of his rookie season because of knee problems, had micro-fracture surgery before last season and wasn't a good fit in Zorn's offense. There's plenty of time for the young fellas to make a move, and the Shanahans are waiting.

There has been limited access to practice during the OTAs, so my observation is based more on conversations and texting with people in the organization than what I've witnessed recently at Redskins Park. And, really, isn't that the way it should be?

By JReid.

No.. The Judge will be on Sundays, Mondays, and sometimes Thursdays and Saturdays between September and February.....

"Although many players respected former defensive coordinator Greg Blache, they privately expressed frustration about Blache's conservative approach in the 4-3 and his unwillingness to try new things."

New News?? I don't remeber hearing this...I think? JReid holding back on us..

So you're pole riding P1 and his "figures don't lie but liars do figures" act. First, P1 chose the facts/stats that supported his argument but very matrix he used showed that overall 'Los was ranked higher than Hall. I guess my eyes weren't lying after all. Second, to say that a person cannot look at two people on the field of play and make a decision about who the person perceives is the better player without looking at stats is ridiculous. How else would a rookie ever start ahead of vet? How does your softball team determine who plays?

"Although many players respected former defensive coordinator Greg Blache, they privately expressed frustration about Blache's conservative approach in the 4-3 and his unwillingness to try new things."

New News?? I don't remeber hearing this...I think? JReid holding back on us..

Posted by: 4thFloor

I think players was on that line of thinking. Based on the "A-B-C, 1-2-3" aka "ho-humness" (sic) of the previous philosophy (Blache), it would seem that players would be eager to get away from that and play within something more, I don't know...

"Obviously, it's early. The Redskins are installing a new defense, so It would not be surprising if Haslett and the players experienced some rocky moments throughout the summer and during the pre-season."
-------------------------
Uhhh, Albert? You're over here, man. No, no..not that side, over here! No, man! Coach changed all that. Look, do us all a favor and just try not to get in the way.

What do we need to be clear on? Is it your position that 'Los cannot cover receivers or support the run when needed? You're so hung up on him getting beat by double moves. CBs get beat by double moves every week. Everybody is a pro. Sometimes a player wins his matchup and sometimes he loses. And unless you know what the call is you can't always say whether a big play is the fault of the CB or whether the safety wasn't where he should have been. You don't like Rogers. I do. No biggie.

Red, what game were you watching? You're going to make me stop talking bball with you. The Lakers frontline (Gasol and Bynum) are why LA was in the game at all. Gasol had 25 and 8 with 6 blocks. Ray Allen and Rondo no less shooting lights out and KB being limited by foul trouble is why the C's won.

Man, this article did nothing to make me feel better about our reciever situation, in fact it flat out bummed me out, thanks Reid!!! Maybe we can overload on tightends and just throw to them all the time, instead of 'wide-outs' we could call them 'wide-ends'!

Let's face it, if both Thomas and Kelly fail this year the offense will be in big trouble especially with the Moss situation. I'm kind of tired hearing the same about these 2 since they've been here. "lingering injuries and still not up to speed"

Bean, seriously. The dude has been a starter on a top ranked defense since he's been here but he can't play his position? And any pro evaluator would say he's a good player but you think he stinks. He doesn't get killed every week by double moves or anything else.

All it took for the Cetlics to take game 2 was a historical record-setting performance by Allen, a once every series triple-double from Rondo, and having Kobe Bryant pick up his 4th and 5th fouls within 2 minutes of the 3rd and 4th quarters, respectively, to secure a 9-point victory.

As long as the Celtics keep pulling off those feats, I expect this to be an easy series to finish off.

The point of the matter is, the defense was good enough last year and the year before. The offense is what was lacking......

Posted by: 4thFloor | June 7, 2010 10:20 AM | Report abuse

Being a top 5 or 10 defense is overrated, we need to be top 5 or 10 in the stats that really count, scoring D and turnovers. The offense has lacked for a long time, but even though the D has been solid, they aren't a 'shutdown' defense. I just hope we take a step forward this year, we don't need the switch to the 3-4 showing more holes in our D.

Check out this statistical evaluation site. http://profootballfocus.com/home.php?tab=home
I was somewhat surprised at "Dirty 30" low rating within the league's starting safeties, and Trylon's rather respectable ranking. BTW, statistically, Hall is ranked higher than LOS.........

I've learned to never throw your previous boss under the bus no matter how much bait they put out there for you.

The point of the matter is, the defense was good enough last year and the year before. The offense is what was lacking......

Posted by: 4thFloor

If say, Portis, were to make comments about the offense under Zorn that would've suggested that it sucked, would you think the same way?

Portis makes, has mdae similar comments when speaking about the system or philosophy on offense. So what if Hall or Haynesworth has something to say about how boring and basic the defense was under Blache?

When it's Portis (or Cooley) making comments like that, he's being honest. (And I agree) But if it's Hall or Haynesworth they're "throwing them under the bus"?

Are the Skins going to go through the year once again without a true #1 WR? It's still early, so there's time to improve, but if DT and/or MK cannot step up a produce respectable numbers with Shanahan's offense and McNabb at QB, will it ever happen for them?

I think the Lakers lost, due to Kobe getting those late fouls, he could not defend when needed, the last 9 points before it got stupid were from Kobe's guy or the guy that he was supposed to pick up during the switch. Without that I think the Lakers would be up 2-0.

Does anyone know how good the class of recievers are supposed to be for next year's draft? How about which recievers are supposed to be Free Agents next year? Hey, I gotta have something to look forward to!

Does anyone know how good the class of recievers are supposed to be for next year's draft? How about which recievers are supposed to be Free Agents next year? Hey, I gotta have something to look forward to!

Posted by: monk811 | June 7, 2010 10:43 AM | Report abuse

Julio Jones from Alabama and AJ Green from Georgia are really good. Both will be draft eligible next year.

Hey, I've always found it funny that people think Carlos Rogers is good in coverage.

If the double move is his achilles heel, then how is he good in coverage? Carlos Rogers is good for falling for that one... particular... move every game. And more often than not, when he gets beat on a double move, he gets beats big -- like TD for six big. If all of this is so, then I ask again, how exactly is he good in coverage, really?

It's like a husband saying when I'm not cheating on my wife and smacking my kids around for spilling a glass of milk, then yeah, I'm a helluva husband.

Seriously though, didn't this dude get cut on a Tuesday less than 24 hours after his performance on MNF?

He just looked like he didn't even know the playbook.

Posted by: RedDMV | June 7, 2010 10:49 AM |

Excellent example.

And Bean, to answer your question, he's been somewhere in between. Like I said, if he was really that bad, he would of been cut. He's been average. But for most CB's in the league, that could be said. He hasn't been a bust, and he hasn't lived up to his draft status. Alot of players could fall into that category.

Hey, I've always found it funny that people think Carlos Rogers is good in coverage.

Posted by: RedDMV | June 7, 2010 10:57 AM

I don't think he's as bad as you are making out to be. From what I've been reading, the Skins played a bunch of man coverage last. That fact has be cited as to one reason for the low interception numbers over the Blache years. If he wasn't an above average cover guy, he would've been beaten a lot more than the occasional double move. In fact, if Los had decent hands, he would have solid interception numbers for his career. The fact he's in position to make those interceptions suggest that he studies his opponent, their tendencies, and has the skill to be in position. Is he elite, no but he is a solid cover guy.

Nobody said he was Neon Deion. This started over whether he was better than Deangelo Hall. This is typical RI. I can't win on original argument so I switch to something else. Bottomline: he has been pretty good, especially when you consider how he's comeback since his knee injury. You look foolish trying to contend otherwise.

If say, Portis, were to make comments about the offense under Zorn that would've suggested that it sucked, would you think the same way?

Portis makes, has mdae similar comments when speaking about the system or philosophy on offense. So what if Hall or Haynesworth has something to say about how boring and basic the defense was under Blache?

When it's Portis (or Cooley) making comments like that, he's being honest. (And I agree) But if it's Hall or Haynesworth they're "throwing them under the bus"?

Can't have it both ways. Just sayin...

Posted by: RedDMV | June 7, 2010 10:30 AM

Dayum Son! You got me....I was thinking off the haywire earlier...

Now that I rethink....I don't think what I wrote was relevant to Sports....

...But I like consistentcy...So if you been throwing someone under since the begining....U kool....

...But if you talked someone up while they was here and throw them under when they not...not kool....

I'm willing to see what DT & MK do this year now that the old excuses are in the past. If they don't produce this year, they're toast.

Also, as blasphemous as it sounds, I would welcome T Owens joining us. I've seen him in several interviews this year, the most recent being last week on NFL Network, and he seems like he's toned down his attitude a bit and just wants to get onto a team with the potential to go to the SB. He specifically expressed interest in the Skins and I think he could help the entire WR corps raise their game. I know the rumors are that he's slowed down, but give me a break...he was at Buffalo. That place makes most players look bad. He looks like he's in great shape, too.

Sign him to a minimal contract and cut him before the season if things just won't work. I think it would be worth the gamble.

Nice to read that the coaching staff is putting a little more complixity into the offensive scheme. Also noted the weekend comments from McNabb that indicated he is studying hard and trying to master the new scheme. Hopefully it means a more open and diversified attack.

Hate to say it, but the incredibly dumbed down version of the former WCO scheme was specifically intended to hide some of the many weaknesses and shortfalls of the former starting quarterback -- and like that same consumate loser, was so dull and predictable that it's a real wonder that we ever scored any points at all.

Offense is always a real task the first year; there are so many nuances. Who the hell knows how far along the O is or how likely it is to turn out well? Certainly not the media and really not even the coaches at this point.

Is there any good evidence that the coaches are doubting MK and DT will be productive? Nope...it would be one thing if they didn't have the physical gifts for WCO, or were un-coachable, but since this isn't the case (apparently) I wouldn't get too worried.

So you're pole riding P1 and his "figures don't lie but liars do figures" act. First, P1 chose the facts/stats that supported his argument but very matrix he used showed that overall 'Los was ranked higher than Hall. I guess my eyes weren't lying after all. Second, to say that a person cannot look at two people on the field of play and make a decision about who the person perceives is the better player without looking at stats is ridiculous. How else would a rookie ever start ahead of vet? How does your softball team determine who plays?

Posted by: learnedhand1 | June 7, 2010 9:45 AM | Report abuse

C'mon LH, do we have to do this again?

2 things to understand about the overall rankings:

1) The rankings are the weighted opinions of the people who run the site and watch the games. So again, people are free to have their opinions, including you. It's just that some opinions are more substantiated than others. For instance, on that site, N.Asamoghua was ranked #14. I doubt you'd agree that there are 13 CBs in the NFL that you'd rather have on your team.

2) The overall ranking is a factor of 2 things that they assess equally: run-support and pass-coverage. If you look at D.Hall's ranking for pass-coverage only, he is ranked ahead of Carlos Rogers - the people who run the site also seem to think that D.Hall is a better corner in coverage which was the context of our initial discussion. D.Hall is heavily penalized for his atrocious run-support, and that is where Carlos Rogers makes up the ground on him in the overall rankings of the bean-counters who run profootball.com. And if you want to talk strictly about which corner is better in run-support alone, I would heartily agree that is Carlos Rogers.

However, I still believe that D.Hall is a better overall cornerback because I'm going to be asking my cornerbacks to perform in pass-coverage far more than I'm going to ask them to perform in run-support. Obviously the ideal corner does both, but if CB #1 can cover the tar out of someone yet is flimsy in run-support and CB #2 is a mess in pass-coverage but provides solid run-support; then I'm going with CB #1.

McNabb talked about playing in the same offense for 11 years, and how difficult it is adjusting to the new one here.

Our offense has been lagging behind our defense for at least a decade because of relentless instability and too much emphasis on aqcuiring other team's big name stars instead of developing our own. That's not all Zorn's fault.

Let's kill the idea once and for all that the Redskins had a top rated defense under Blache. That's total BS. Blache's defense never forced turnovers, NEVER scored points, and NEVER came up with crucial stops to win games in the 4th quarter, when it counts. NEVER.
Rating defenses by yards allowed is like rating women by cup size. It only tells you one thing, and not necessarily the most important thing.
F Blache. And F his "top rated" defense.

There has been limited access to practice during the OTAs, so my observation is based more on conversations and texting with people in the organization than what I've witnessed recently at Redskins Park. And, really, isn't that the way it should be?

By JReid.

No.. The Judge will be on Sundays, Mondays, and sometimes Thursdays and Saturdays between September and February.....

Posted by: 4thFloor | June 7, 2010 9:35 AM | Report abuse

i think you are missing his point. he is saying that things should be held secret and not in a huge display for the press. Past some regimes did not do this. It's a good thing to keep it mostly secret till the opener.

""Devin Thomas...hasn't displayed the type of play-after-play consistency the Shanahans like to see from that position.""

This is what I feared about Devin THomas. By all accounts, Zorn's schemes/playbook were about as simple and elementary as it gets. Yet Thomas took a long time to learn plays, learn where to lineup, learn where to run, etc. etc.

With the Shanny's implementing even more complex schemes, is it gonna take another year and half for Thomas to post his second 100 yard game of his career?

Alan you are still holding that torch for Zorn huh? The skins with Zorn/Campbell were miserable last year you catch any of the games?

Posted by: TimmySmith36 | June 7, 2010 12:08 PM | Report abuse

And going by your name...you are holding the torch for a RB who only played one good game in his whole career that happen to be in the SB but it was the line that opened up holes that literally a semi truck could have gone through. He comes back the next season...made the starter fumbles 6 times in 4 games..is cut....then years later he sits in prison for trafficking Cocaine! LOL

I glanced at a headline which declared that "only 3 teams have changed more" than the Skins during this off season. Sounds like an indictment of Cerrato to me!

Now is the season to separate the wheat from the chaff. Let's find out what this dynamic duo can do now. Let them either lift off and fly, or let Shanny and company dump them unceremoniously like all the other rejects from the Cerrato era.

After a 4-12 record and national disgrace, a complete makeover isn't such a bad thing.

shanahans schemes are no more complex than most other teams, this is football not physics and studying tachyon energy. don't know and no one else including writer of this blog what kelly or thomas will do alot of these articles are nothing but a bunch of hog-sh-t filling up dead time. I am not sold on shanahan or haslett as coaches,shanahan his last 2yrs at denver was beaten regularly and choked blowing the division to the chargers, haslett saints defense were getting ran over and deep sixed on long passes.

"Check out this statistical evaluation site. http://profootballfocus.com/home.php?tab=home
I was somewhat surprised at "Dirty 30" low rating within the league's starting safeties, and Trylon's rather respectable ranking. BTW, statistically, Hall is ranked higher than LOS.........

Posted by: Spanglerg | June 7, 2010 10:30 AM "

REALYY SPANGLER???
Let's see, there are 32 teams in the league, each with 2 starting CBs. So if Carlos Rogers is ranked 52, that means that 19 teams have "2" (that is TWO) CBs better than him, and he is only good enough to be the number 2 CB on 13 teams...humm....doesn't loog too good....at least we have DeAngelo....
Oh wait, Hall is ranked 76!! That means that 11 teams have "3" (that is THREE) CBs better that him, and the best he could do would be the nickel guy for the other 21 teams, well except for the Skins. He is our franchise CB after all!
Gosh I miss Champ! even at his age, he is still a top ten CB.
And I certaily miss # 28, he was the real deal, and I think people might have forgotten by now how good he was year in and year out.

That dude took 43 sacks like a champ, and even if some were his fault, I'd be hardpressed to call him a loser.

He'll be an NFL lifer even if he somehow fails in Oaktown.

Posted by: MistaMoe | June 7, 2010 11:54 AM | Report abuse

I call him a loser because he has a sub-500 record as a starter.

Not sure what other criteria you'd go by...that's sort of the textbook definition of "losing" I think.

Posted by: p1funk | June 7, 2010 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Jason was traded to the Raiders. we have a new QB.... Can we move on please?

Posted by: leevi98 | June 7, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

I'm a diehard Skins fan (as I'm sure everyone else is who posts here), and I am pulling hard for our team's success with D McNabb. But I for one will be interested to see the reaction (if any) of JC detractors like Vic1 and p1funk if the Raiders led by JC outplay the Skins over the next few years. I think it is naturally interesting to see whether very strongly held opinions (i.e. JC is a "consummate loser") are actually correct in the end. In my observation, the most opinionated people often prove in the end to be the least credible (and subsequently the least accountable!).